lists.openwall.net   lists  /  announce  owl-users  owl-dev  john-users  john-dev  passwdqc-users  yescrypt  popa3d-users  /  oss-security  kernel-hardening  musl  sabotage  tlsify  passwords  /  crypt-dev  xvendor  /  Bugtraq  Full-Disclosure  linux-kernel  linux-netdev  linux-ext4  linux-hardening  linux-cve-announce  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
 
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:   Mon, 8 Apr 2019 19:03:27 -0700
From:   Ricardo Neri <ricardo.neri-calderon@...ux.intel.com>
To:     Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Cc:     Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...e.de>,
        Ashok Raj <ashok.raj@...el.com>,
        Andi Kleen <andi.kleen@...el.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        "Ravi V. Shankar" <ravi.v.shankar@...el.com>, x86@...nel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Ricardo Neri <ricardo.neri@...el.com>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>,
        Philippe Ombredanne <pombredanne@...b.com>,
        Kate Stewart <kstewart@...uxfoundation.org>,
        "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 02/14] x86/hpet: Expose more functions to read and
 write registers

On Tue, Mar 26, 2019 at 10:00:24PM +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Wed, 27 Feb 2019, Ricardo Neri wrote:
> >  struct irq_data;
> > @@ -109,6 +114,11 @@ extern void hpet_unregister_irq_handler(rtc_irq_handler handler);
> >  static inline int hpet_enable(void) { return 0; }
> >  static inline int is_hpet_enabled(void) { return 0; }
> >  #define hpet_readl(a) 0
> > +#define hpet_writel(d, a)
> 
> What for?
> 
> > +#ifdef CONFIG_X86_64
> > +#define hpet_readq(a) 0
> > +#define hpet_writeq(d, a)
> > +#endif
> 
> Ditto.
> 
> There are no users outside of HPET and your new HPET watchdog code for
> those. And both are not compiled when CONFIG_HPET=n.

I'll remove these unneeded defintions.
> 
> The only reason to have the hpet_readl() define, which btw. should be an
> inline, is to avoid massive ifdeffery in the TSC calibration code.

May I ask what is the problem with the #define hpet_readl()? Commit
bfc0f5947afa("x86: merge tsc calibration") changed it from inline to
#define. Should I change it back?

Thanks and BR,
Ricardo

Powered by blists - more mailing lists